June 2011. Unlawful anti-extremism

In June 2011, a notable event was Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court Russian Federation N11 "On judicial practice on criminal cases about crimes extremist orientation" dated June 28 - the first, though not quite sure step towards improving the situation in this sphere (see our detailed commentary here ).

A number of Supreme Court clarifications can be considered almost revolutionary. In particular, The Supreme Court pointed out that criticism of political, ideological and religious associations in and of itself cannot be considered arousal. hate that the limits of what is acceptable in criticism of officials and professional politicians more broadly than in similar criticism individuals that the examination should appointed only when necessary and also that experts should not be asked questions repeating the wording of the Criminal Code. About such abuses, human rights activists been talking for years, and now it's impossible not to rejoice that their voice has been heard.

On the other hand, the decision is not was able to provide insight into a number of important controversial points. In particular, it is not it says which groups it concerns criminal anti-extremist hate motive legislation to a social group. With no explanation at all left the essence of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (organization activity of an extremist organization): so it is not clear whether it is possible to consider continuation of activities prohibited organization activities carried out under a changed name and symbolism, but the same persons and the same in essence.

Of course, the Supreme Court could not exhaust the fullness of the problems, related to illegal anti-extremism, since their main source are the faults of the law itself.

In addition, on the effectiveness of the Decree can only speak after monitoring court decisions in the coming months. Unfortunately, practice shows that the courts often ignore the opinion the Supreme Court that we observed from last year's Resolution of the Supreme Court on rules for the application of the Mass Media Law.

Criminal prosecution

In June, two illegal criminal cases on Art. 282 of the Criminal Code: in relation to employees newspaper "Evening Tyumen" and in against a member of the Communist Party in Kirov. In both cases it was about the initiation of social hate. In Tyumen it was hatred to the police, in Kirov to a very strange group - "deputies State Duma, different from the deputies of the Communist Party". Unfortunately, the Tyumen case was closed not for rehabilitative circumstances, and after the expiration of the statute of limitations.

Was issued in June verdict on Said Nursi's follower Orenburg. He was found guilty of organization of prohibited activities for the extremism of a Muslim organization "Nurcular" (part 1 of article 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and sentenced to a real prison term in a year and a half.

In addition, a new trial began in June over Jehovah's Witness Alexander Kalistratov in Gorno-Altaisk. He already was acquitted on charges of inciting religious hatred (Article 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), however, the acquittal was overturned by a higher court.

Administrative persecution

In June, at least four judgments on unlawful allegations of administrative violations in Omsk, Ulyanovsk, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and in the Sverdlovsk region. In the last two cases, directors were fined libraries for having in their collections banned books found. Actually, they were punished for doing their official duties, because keeping books even if they are prohibited is a direct function of the libraries.

This is the argument made in June Omsk Pushkin Library, refusing to comply prosecutor's office to withdraw from the funds the prohibited literature. This is the first known to us a similar case where the library defended itself in a similar situations. Recall that anti-extremist and library legislation are in conflict with each other which leads to numerous sanctions against libraries that, by doing one inevitably violates the other. In June we have noticed a significant increase number of such sanctions.

Warnings and cautions about inadmissibility of extremist activities

In June warnings of inadmissibility extremist activities were wrongfully issued by one public organization and one magazine. In the first case for extremism was issued a complaint discrimination (warning issued Taimyr organization "Protection of rights indigenous peoples of the North"). In the second warning of Roskomnadzor received the Kalmyk literary and artistic magazine "Teegin Girl" for academic publication of some folklore text during the Second World War, glorifying German intelligence officer (however, we do not were able to find the text itself and we can to admit that he himself aroused hatred in extreme forms).

Illegal anti-extremist warnings were issued to the activist Communist Party in Zhigulevsk for anti-Putin leaflet and site administrator libertarian communist organizations "Autonomous action" in Kazan for excitation of social hatred towards political opponents.

Recognition of materials as extremist

At the very end of June, two significant decisions on recognition as extremist materials of Scientologists and Witnesses Jehovah.

In Salsk (Rostov region) nine were declared extremist titles of books and magazines of the Witnesses Jehovah, and six of them already are on the federal list. extremist materials.

In Shchelkovo (Moscow region) were Ron's works banned again Hubbard. At the time of this writing the news is not known neither the name nor even the total number of banned books. Note that only a month ago Federal list of extremist literature materials were seized Scientologists whose ban was lifted Surgut court.

Rulemaking

In June, the only issued a legislative initiative bill submitted to the State Duma party of Vladimir Zhirinovsky, proposing the complete abolition of the Federal Law "On extremist activities". Arguments that, when this leads the Liberal Democratic Party, look exclusively reasonable, but the bill is obviously declarative. This law can be repealed only if incidental change in other regulatory acts, including the Criminal Code, which contain references to him. In addition, they call doubt the true motives of the Liberal Democrats, who proposed this change in legislation. Most likely, this populist move to attracting the sympathies of the radical nationalists.